linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 4/5] arm64: add support for ACPI Low Power Idle(LPI)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 13 Jun 2016 10:40:20 +0100
From:	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:	"Sajjan, Vikas C" <vikas.cha.sajjan@....com>
Cc:	"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Lakshminarasimha, Sunil Vishwanathpur" <sunil.vl@....com>,
	Prashanth Prakash <pprakash@...eaurora.org>,
	Ashwin Chaugule <ashwin.chaugule@...aro.org>,
	Al Stone <al.stone@...aro.org>,
	Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/5] arm64: add support for ACPI Low Power Idle(LPI)



On 13/06/16 05:47, Sajjan, Vikas C wrote:
> Hi Sudeep,
>

[...]

> --- a/drivers/firmware/psci.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/psci.c
> @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
>
>   #define pr_fmt(fmt) "psci: " fmt
>
> +#include <linux/acpi.h>
>   #include <linux/arm-smccc.h>
>   #include <linux/cpuidle.h>
>   #include <linux/errno.h>
> @@ -310,11 +311,66 @@ static int psci_dt_cpu_init_idle(struct device_node *cpu_node, int cpu)
>   	return ret;
>   }
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
> +#include <acpi/processor.h>
> +
> +static int __maybe_unused psci_acpi_cpu_init_idle(unsigned int cpu) {
> +	int i, count;
> +	u32 *psci_states;
> +	struct acpi_processor *pr;
> +	struct acpi_lpi_state *lpi;
> +
> +	pr = per_cpu(processors, cpu);
> +	if (unlikely(!pr || !pr->flags.has_lpi))
>
> Any particular reason for _not_ considering CST flag here.
> Or you are planning to add CST support in some other patch set.
>

Are you referring the old C-state objects ? We don't support them on
ARM64. Only LPIs are support. The ARM FFH is not defined for CST, only
for LPIs.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep